Quote:
Originally Posted by TrackRat
If I were a manufacturer I would definitely take this case to trial. I want to see the court that makes a manufacturer warranty a product in a form they didn't sell it. I also want to see where the terms and conditions of a warranty can be changed to suit a person who knows from the get go that alterations to the product void the warranty. I'd definitely take that bet in a court of law.  |
And I absolutely agree with you.
But the mitigating factor here is that an automobile is not a singular product. It is a sum of many different individual parts that are judged, warranted and viewed from a legal perspective as the many parts they are.
If your house comes with a warranty that covers the roof. You change the plastic wall plates on your electrical outlet to a different color and brand than what the builder installed and sold you - you STILL have a roof warranty.
Now if the plastic outlet plates somehow short out the outlets and a fire destroys part of the roof. You have NO warranty because a part you installed caused the damage.
Now if your new outlet plates have NOT caused anything to go wrong in your house and you make a claim to the builder that your roof leaked last time it rained. They just cannot deny your claim on the grounds that you have changed things in the house since you bought it.
Same with the car. Do what you want. You will have a warranty UNLESS something you did actually damages something else in the car that the manufacturer installed as part of the original purchase.